To evaluate the risk of adverse birth outcomes among adults who use electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) before and during pregnancy.
Data from the 2016-2018 PRAMS (Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System) were used to assess the association between e-cigarette use during the 3 months before and last 3 months of pregnancy among 79,176 individuals with a recent live birth and the following birth outcomes preterm birth, small for gestational age, and low birth weight (LBW). Adjusted prevalence ratios were generated using average marginal predictions from multivariable logistic regression models. Models were stratified by prenatal combustible cigarette smoking and frequency of e-cigarette use (daily or less than daily use).
In the 3 months before pregnancy, 2.7% (95% CI 2.6-2.9%) of respondents used e-cigarettes; 1.1% (95% CI 1.0-1.2%) used e-cigarettes during the last 3 months of pregnancy. Electronic cigarette use before pregnancy was not associated with adverse birth outcomes. Electronic cigarette use during pregnancy was associated with increased prevalence of LBW compared with nonuse (8.1% vs 6.1%; adjusted prevalence ratio 1.33; 95% CI 1.06-1.66). Among respondents who did not also smoke combustible cigarettes during pregnancy (n=72,256), e-cigarette use was associated with higher prevalence of LBW (10.6%; adjusted prevalence ratio 1.88; 95% CI 1.38-2.57) and preterm birth (12.4%; adjusted prevalence ratio 1.69; 95% CI 1.20-2.39). https://www.selleckchem.com/products/LY335979.html When further stratified by frequency of e-cigarette use, associations were seen only for daily users.
E-cigarette use during pregnancy, particularly when used daily by individuals who do not also smoke combustible cigarettes, is associated with adverse birth outcomes.
E-cigarette use during pregnancy, particularly when used daily by individuals who do not also smoke combustible cigarettes, is associated with adverse birth outcomes.To assess pregnancy risk after intrauterine device (IUD) placement by the number and timing of unprotected intercourse episodes in the prior 14 days.
This was a secondary analysis of a randomized trial that compared the copper T380A IUD and levonorgestrel 52-mg intrauterine system for emergency contraception. At enrollment, participants had a negative urine pregnancy test result and reported the frequency and timing of any unprotected intercourse in the preceding 14 days. We assessed pregnancies 1 month after IUD placement and compared pregnancy risk by single or multiple unprotected intercourse episodes and by timing (5 or fewer days before IUD placement or 6 or more days before).
Among the 655 participants, one pregnancy occurred in a patient who reported intercourse once 48 hours before IUD placement. Multiple unprotected intercourse episodes were reported by 286 participants (43.7%), and 95 participants (14.4%) reported at least one unprotected intercourse episode 6 or more days before IUD placement. No pregnancies occurred among those with multiple unprotected intercourse episodes (0%, 97.5% CI 0-1.3%) or with any unprotected intercourse episode 6-14 days before IUD placement (0.0%, 97.5% CI 0.0-3.8%). Pregnancy risk difference did not significantly differ by single compared with multiple unprotected intercourse episodes (0.3%, 95% CI -0.3% to 0.8%), nor by unprotected intercourse 5 or fewer days before IUD placement or 6 or more days before (0.2%, 95% CI -0.2% to 0.5%).
With a negative urine pregnancy test result at IUD placement, 1-month pregnancy risk remains low, regardless of frequency or timing of unprotected intercourse in the prior 14 days.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02175030.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02175030.To evaluate the effectiveness of acute nifedipine tocolysis in preventing preterm birth in women in preterm labor.
This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of nifedipine in women with a singleton pregnancy between 28 0/7 and 33 6/7 weeks of gestation who were admitted with uterine activity, intact membranes, and cervical dilatation from 2 to 4 cm. Women were randomized to receive nifedipine 20 mg or placebo orally, followed by a repeat dose after 90 minutes if contractions persisted. The study drug was continued every 4 hours to complete a 48-hour regimen. The primary outcome was birth before 37 weeks of gestation. A total of 150 women were necessary to detect a one-third reduction in this outcome. After treating 88 patients, a preplanned interim analysis of blinded outcomes by the Data Safety Monitoring Committee recommended discontinuation of the trial due to futility.
A total of 90 women were enrolled between May 2014 and November 2017. After two women withdrew, 88 were analyzed 46 in the nifedipine group and 42 in the placebo group. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of delivery before 37 weeks of gestation in the nifedipine group compared with the placebo group (52% vs 48%, relative risk [RR] 1.1, 95% CI 0.7-1.7), nor in the secondary outcome of delivery at least 48 hours from randomization (78% vs 71%, respectively, RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.9-1.4). There were also no significant differences between groups in neonatal outcomes.
Acute tocolysis of preterm labor with nifedipine did not affect preterm birth rates, delivery within 48 hours, or neonatal outcomes.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02132533.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02132533.To explore the practices of obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns) in the United States surrounding postpartum sterilization when the Medicaid consent form was not valid.
Using the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' online directory, we conducted a qualitative study where we recruited ob-gyns practicing in 10 geographically diverse U.S. states for a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews conducted by telephone. We analyzed interview transcripts using the constant comparative method and principles of grounded theory.
Thirty ob-gyns (63% women, 77% nonsubspecialized, and 53% academic setting) were interviewed. Although most physicians stated that they did not perform sterilizations without a valid Medicaid sterilization form, others noted that they sometimes did due to a sense of ethical obligation toward their patient's health, being in a role with more authority or seniority, interpreting the emergency justification section of the form more broadly, or backdating the form. The physicians who said that they never went ahead without a signed form tended to work at large institutions and were concerned with losing funding and engaging in potentially illegal or fraudulent behavior.